Using Localized Data to Highlight Sub-optimal Pathway Adherence in the UK
By: Paul Sutton | July 02, 2015
We have spoken in previous blogs about the value relationship that needs to exist between biopharma and the NHS (both payers and providers), and the need for biopharma to help those payers and providers develop confidence to use a new product. Biopharma needs to address two related, but different, concerns:
Providing payer support
The need to invest in improving adherence has generally been acknowledged by payers. Biopharma is often expected to cover the cost of formal adherence support, as part of its growing responsibility to think ‘beyond the pill’. Barriers for truly effective patient adherence and engagement programs remain, due to:
The most successful adherence strategies are tailored to the patient rather than the disease. To get as close as possible to meeting the needs of the patient, biopharma must utilize mechanisms for identifying non-adherent patients within a local pathway in order to measure the extent of their non-compliance. This can be achieved by sourcing local data to analyze core pathway frailties that may be contributing to non-adherence, presenting solutions to improve that core pathway.Nurse audits and outcomes evaluations can delve deeper into real-world data using the insight and experience of in-the-field staff within that local health economy, further exploring what motivates individual patients to adhere or not. These tools can inform biopharma-led support services and patient support programs designed to improve the core pathway.
Locally sourced data can include:
The power of patient centricity
Alongside real-world data, biopharma must also analyze patient characteristics to solve the adherence puzzle. There are a number of personal, patient-specific reasons for non-adherence, and these can be intentional or unintentional. Physical reasons can include unpleasant side effects of the drug, and psychological reasons could be that the patient does not want to accept they have the condition. A patient’s support network and co-morbidities can play a huge role in their motivation, and their individual circumstances must be taken into account. So it is important to provide bespoke adherence support programs that manage the patient within their individual circumstances as well as within the spectrum of their disease.
Localized data can support biopharma in its commitment to identifying and improving sub-optimal pathway adherence. Tools such as outcomes audits and evaluations and health informatics can allow biopharma to analyze core pathway frailties and patterns that are contributing to non-adherence within specific patient cohorts. Adherence issues can then be tackled in a number of ways, for example by pathway redesign or instigating patient engagement programs. The success of such programs can also be demonstrated in the local, real-world data that payers require for proving the outcomes of a drug in the local health economy. This helps biopharma to gain adoption on payer formularies faster, and also demonstrates a longer-term commitment to adherence that will improve its relationship with the NHS.
If biopharma can prove that it understands why patients are non-adherent within a specific pathway, and demonstrate how its product can solve this problem, it can open up a number of market access opportunities such as joint working projects with the NHS. Successful market access depends on biopharma’s use of localized data to prove that its products can add additional value.
To find out more about how an improvement in patient adherence would positively impact the wider health economy and the outcomes of the ‘Triple Aim’ – download the Quintiles white paper "Influencing patient adherence in an outcomes focused era".